Opinions please - how do I deal with this, do I need a solicitor?

clutton_2

actually i am not gonna be mrs calm-nice-guy today - you know what - i am going to write exactly how i felt when reading this original post

What a blooddy cheek this maddie has !!

she signs a 12 month agreement, reneges on it FIVE MONTHS IN, then tries to get money out of the landlord !!!!!

glad you aint my tenant lady

Strapped

I'd say you didn't really have a leg to stand on - hard to prove (even IF he has a duty to do so) that a LL has not taken any steps to find a new tennant - if he is registered with an agency then that is sufficient. In your shoes, I'd've been making flippin' sure to find new tennants myself if I expected to see a penny back (or in your case, not to be held to the contract I signed and pay up the rent to May).

kunekune

I have a slightly different take. Yeah, the duty to mitigate is not absolute. But this landlord put potential tenants off by doing repairs that made the house uninhabitable. That is something you might do in between tenancies ... but if you have even a limited duty to mitigate, I suspect that means you can't have it both ways. Either you're actively seeking a new tenant (albeit perhaps at the expense/effort of the old tenant) or you're not, and the kitchen work suggests not. Not sure if I can be bothered to go and look the law up though. If this was equity, I'd ask whether this LL had 'clean hands' ...

clutton_2

"" But this landlord put potential tenants off by doing repairs that made the house uninhabitable. ""

we only have the tenants side of this story - we dont know what was the cause of the need for repair - Maddies view that the work took too long is bound to be a slanted viewpoint. ......

if a LL does repairs inbetween tenants here - he is damned

if he does not do them - he will no doubt be judged as a rubbish landlord

another no-win situation for LLs

tbs624

kunekune wrote: »

I have a slightly different take. Yeah, the duty to mitigate is not absolute. But this landlord put potential tenants off by doing repairs that made the house uninhabitable. That is something you might do in between tenancies ... but if you have even a limited duty to mitigate, I suspect that means you can't have it both ways. Either you're actively seeking a new tenant (albeit perhaps at the expense/effort of the old tenant) or you're not, and the kitchen work suggests not. Not sure if I can be bothered to go and look the law up though. If this was equity, I'd ask whether this LL had 'clean hands' ...

A potential T should not necessarily be put off by a LL who is completing necessary work on the property - surely most T's would prefer to know that their potential LL attends to repairs? Agree with Clutton on this one.

Look back at what the OP says:

This was due to several issues including the fact that the landlord and estate agents messed around until the applicants got fed up, and that the landlord took up the kitchen floor to repair then left the mouldy floorboards exposed for weeks (supposedly to dry out but it took longer than needed).

We then had to give up with our attempts to find tenants given that we were getting married in Dec and had no spare time.

S/he doesn't clarify what she means by the LL/LA "messing around" - does she simply mean that they required appropriate references financial checks and the potential T's didn't meet the criteria? Did s/he (as the one seeking to breach his/her contractual obligations) do her utmost or did s/he stand around with one of those "I hate my LL" faces? If I was the current T, I think I would have been standing there singing the praises of my LL to any potential Ts.

The T also mentions that his/her approaching wedding left them with no spare time - if I wanted to make sure I wan't left out of pocket I would have viewed helping to get those new Ts to take over my responsibilities as coming higher up the agenda than place settings and which colour flowers to have.

N79

clutton wrote: »

actually i am not gonna be mrs calm-nice-guy today - you know what - i am going to write exactly how i felt when reading this original post

What a blooddy cheek this maddie has !!

she signs a 12 month agreement, reneges on it FIVE MONTHS IN, then tries to get money out of the landlord !!!!!

glad you aint my tenant lady

That was exactly how I felt hence my rather tense first posts. I found it incredible that this T feels they are owed money. I was not in the mood to post up Reichman case to explain to them why their legal understanding was suspect.

As usual TBS had far more patience than I could ever muster.

kunekune

I guess much depends on which version of the story you believe. My thoughts were premised on it being correct. My reading was that the house was uninhabitable for part of the time because of repairs and that the LL had indicated complete unwillingness to do anything to get a tenant - this could mean they were deliberately stalling when potential tenants cropped up. That was why I was wondering out loud about whether the strict view was entirely correct. It might reduce the amount she owes in unpaid rent. And failing to protect the deposit does not yell "fantastic, responsible landlord" to me.

Maddie

Thanks for the help guys, but I do think some of you have been rather harsh.

I came on here for advice and to clarify my understanding, which as it seems is probably wrong.

When we moved out we had lined someone up to move in, and were waiting for the credit check to come through. After repeatedly chasing up the estate agents to see if it had come back I asked when they had sent it off...she investigated then said the landlord hadn't approved the check so it hadn't been sent off yet. I then got the landlord to contact them so it could be sent off. After another long wait I pressed the estate agents again and this time they revealed that the potential Ts had not even paid for the check yet.

The kitchen floor had needed replacing from when we first moved in, and we had been promised by the landlord that it would be done. After saying we were looking to move out the LL said he wouldn't do it until we were out since it would be easier with the house empty, therefore I don't think I should be liable for any rent during the time until the new floor was down in any case.

When I rang my firms legal helpline I was told that perhaps the LL wasn't mitigating losses by not using a dehumidifier to speed up the repair - even I thought that was a bit OTT!

I continued to travel back (an hour each way) regulary and found several more possible replacements. Despite the landlord admitting that the estate agents had messed up and perhaps they'd be better to use a different one, he continued to tell potential tenants to do the credit checks through the same ones.

After various potential Ts eventually finding somewhere else after initially wanting the house, I followed the last group of potential Ts very closely, calling the landlord, Ts and EA regularly to check progress.

The Ts arranged time off work to go to the EAs with forms and money. I rang the EA during the day too see if they'd come in yet. They told me they'd brought forms but not paid. I rang Ts straight away who said they'd took forms and cash but EA refused to take the cash. I can't remember whether I checked but I think this was because the LL hadn't confirmed they were happy with the tenants. This really annoyed me as once potential Ts had paid over a load of money for a credit check, they would be far less likely to loose interest, but it seems that all along the EA had been turning this cash away!

At this point I gave in as yes, I was very busy with organising the wedding and sorting out a new house. And no, I wasn't more interested in choosing the colours of my flowers and the place settings, but I think there was a limit to how much time I could dedicate to this. In fact we didn't have flowers or place settings but that is besides the point.

Admittedly I could have recommenced the search once we were back from honeymoon, but by this time I had other issues to deal with and did think I had put in a reasonable amount of effort already.

Like I said in the initail post, I don't morally think it is fair for me to get all the money back from the landlord. I can see this from the LL's point of view and whilst I know it was all stemmed from us, I think if I was him I would have been more helpful in finding a replacement.

Thanks for the Reichmann & Dunn v Gauntlett & Beveridge info. I find this quite confusing as I thought I understood the concept of having to mitigate losses, so don't really see why it doesn't apply. It can't have been a stupid viewpoint though since it was shared by Gauntlett & Beveridge who ran a lawfirm at the premises. Plus it may not apply to residential tenancies.

From the replies it seems what I should do is stay quiet and see what the landlord does. If he tries to get more money from me then I should speak to a solicitor as its all more complex than I had thought.

tbs624

Maddie wrote: »

Thanks for the help guys, but I do think some of you have been rather harsh...

Maddie - sorry that you felt that some of us were being unnecessarily harsh. The problem with a public forum , or with any form of communication I suppose, is that in *your* head you have the full picture but the other party can only go on what you initially tell them /post up. Now that you have posted a bit more info about the behaviour of the LA/LL with regard to replacement T's it's a little easier for us to understand your viewpoint.

If it makes you feel any better we'd have been equally "harsh" had your LL posted up that he hadn't scheme-registered your tenancy deposit, because there is no excuse for that one. As I said before, that bit may give you some negotiation leverage, depending on what the LL does once he knows that you are aware it should have been scheme registered.

clutton_2

if you come to a public forum you will get a wide variety of answers. you may not like all of them.

unfortunately neither you nor the Agent can tell a landlord WHICH prospective tenant he will or wont find suitable - its his commercial decision only. As you have so eloquently proved - not all tenant abide by their signed written contracts.

i cannot condone any landlord who does not use a TDS - but this is an entirely separate issue to your not paying rent for the legally contracted period.

not wanting to pay rent for a period of repairs - is just childish.

i do however find it odd that cash deposits were not acceptable to the agent.